1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) On December 4, 2014, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter referred to as the “Korean Intellectual Property Office”) of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter referred to as “ordinary technician”) shall have ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains.

(2) On December 23, 2014, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter “Korea Intellectual Property Office”) issued a second notice of the submission of the opinion to the effect that the patent cannot be granted because the nonobviousness is denied on the grounds that the invention could easily be claimed from prior inventions 1 and 2. The Plaintiffs submitted a written amendment to amend the detailed description of the invention on December 23, 2014. However, on February 25, 2015, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter “Korea Intellectual Property Office”) issued a second notice of the submission of the opinion to the effect that the nonobviousness is denied because the ordinarily skilled person could easily make the invention from prior inventions 1,

3) On March 11, 2015, the Plaintiffs submitted an amendment to correct the claims (3) and to delete the detailed description corresponding thereto (hereinafter “instant invention”). The Plaintiffs’ patent application invention based on the amendment made on March 11, 2015, referred to as “instant patent application invention”; the claim 1 of the instant patent application invention as “instant Claim 1”; and the remainder of claims are referred to as “the instant patent application invention” in the same manner.

(4) However, on May 18, 2015, the Korean Intellectual Property Office examiner rendered a decision of rejection that the instant patent application invention did not resolve the grounds for rejection of the notice of the second submission of opinions. (4) The Plaintiffs dissatisfied with the decision and filed a petition for trial seeking revocation of the said decision of rejection with the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board 2015 Won3217 on June 4, 2015.

However, on December 18, 2015, the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board on the ground that “the nonobviousness of the instant Claim Nos. 1 is denied by prior inventions 1 and 2, and where a patent application contains two or more claims, the application shall be rejected entirely if there is a ground for rejection even one claim.”